Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
A Nonny Moose

Hostess Brands Inc. - (R.I.P.?)

59 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

Sad but true. Apparently the larger teamster's union disagreed with the smaller baker's union. [link]

There is also the factor that many of their products are . . . how to put it? . . . of questionable value. I imagine their sales have been decreasing.

Twinkies barely qualify as food. I was fond of their chocolate cupcakes, though, back when I could eat such things. (I'm on a gluten-free diet now.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as deep-fried twinkies are popular in certain areas of the country, I wonder what will be the replacement? It is possible some unhealthy Chinese product will become popular. I know I like various Japanese and Korean desserts. It shows how corrupt unions are detrimental to workers as well.

Thank you the information,

--Ocram

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the only reference I have from Twinkies is in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzfoeBMrocM. Unfortunately, I haven't found it in English, but what Apu says is approximately "Not smart customer, you can't damage a Twinkie". Guess that they aren't the most healthy food on Earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • We need a Twinkie bailout. It's working for GMC.

    GMC was having market trouble, not labour trouble. Killed by the union. I feel sorry for the people who are not in the striking union, as for the others, I feel no sympathy whatsoever. When you go on strike the employer has this ultimate defence called wrapping up the company.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Well, the only reference I have from Twinkies is in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzfoeBMrocM. Unfortunately, I haven't found it in English, but what Apu says is approximately "Not smart customer, you can't damage a Twinkie". Guess that they aren't the most healthy food on Earth.

    Ingredients:

    Enriched Bleached Wheat Flour [Flour, Reduced Iron, B Vitamins (Niacin, Thiamine Mononitrate (B1), Riboflavin (B2), Folic Acid)], Corn Syrup, Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Water, Partially Hydrogenated Vegetable and/or Animal Shortening (Soybean, Cottonseed and/or Canola Oil, Beef Fat), Whole Eggs, Dextrose. Contains 2% or Less of: Modified Corn Starch, Glucose, Leavenings (Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate, Baking Soda, Monocalcium Phosphate), Sweet Dairy Whey, Soy Protein Isolate, Calcium and Sodium Caseinate, Salt, Mono and Diglycerides, Polysorbate 60, Soy Lecithin, Soy Flour, Cornstarch, Cellulose Gum, Sodium Stearoyl Lactylate, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Sorbic Acid (to Retain Freshness), Yellow 5, Red 40.

    Nutritional value:

    Nutrition Facts

    Calories 150 (627 kJ)

    Calories from fat 41

    Total Fat 4.5g

    Sat. Fat 2.5g

    Trans Fat 0g

    Cholesterol 20mg

    Sodium 220mg

    Total Carbs. 27g

    Dietary Fiber 0g

    Sugars 19g

    Protein 1g

    Calcium 20mg

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Anyone who has seen Zombieland will understand

    3rt200.jpg

    :golly:

    Did you know before WWII Twinkies had banana cream filling? Due to a banana shortage during the war they had to make due without them and it stuck.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    My favorite pastry was always Yodels, which are made by Drake's and thus unaffected by this. I never cared for Twinkies.

    Not seeing wonder bread in the stores is going to be weird though. Sad to say that white bread has declined in popularity, as people have shifted back to healthier whole wheat bread.

    Personally I hold that there are a few groups of words you can stick on a product which guarantee it will not be tasty. "Whole wheat" is on that list along with "fat free", "low sodium", and "organic".

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    My favorite pastry was always Yodels, which are made by Drake's and thus unaffected by this. I never cared for Twinkies.

    Drake's is a Hostess brand.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Well, I beg to differ, Duke87. Organic food tastes the same as standard food, it merely costs more. Most candy is fat free. Whole beans (frijoles de la hoya) are cholesterol free, as well as most peanut (and other nut) butters. Whole wheat, however is not particularly tasty though neither is sourdough white bread. Adding tons of sugar in the form of molasses or honey and/or adding more tasty grains, nuts, and other seeds bumps up the flavor. On the negative side, you have "all natural snake oil" and tasteless battery/factory farmed food. Then again, my family has been in the restaurant business for generations (usually only one or two members of a generation worked in restaurants as a career but still).

    Personally, I don't care for most products by that company because there are healthier and arguably tastier alternatives. If I had free time, I could also bake something superb using a Cakemix Doctor recipe.

    --Ocram

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • Well, it is time for Twinkiegeddon.

    I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for them to return.

    Now, about the "organic" label. It is a F-R-A-U-D. Most of the time the ingredients are no more or less organic than the other foods.

    Organic veggies are supposed to raised without chemicals including insecticides and chemical fertilizers. Most farmers use liquified pig manure on their fields anyway, so that's organic for you. Just be sure you wash those veggies well.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Drake's is a Hostess brand.

    It, what... *looks up*... oh. Okay, now that's odd. Considering the similarity between Drake's and Hostess products, why expend the resources to maintain the manufacture of both if both are owned by the same people? Another mismanagement issue! I would have assumed that they must be competitors. Apparently they haven't been since 1998.

    Then again, it's not a unique situation. Hot Wheels and Matchbox are both owned by Mattel.

    Still, I would say this is a great example of overconglomeration. Why should one company own more than one brand that makes the same product? Perhaps some antitrust action is in order for remaining cases like this.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Drake's is a Hostess brand.

    It, what... *looks up*... oh. Okay, now that's odd. Considering the similarity between Drake's and Hostess products, why expend the resources to maintain the manufacture of both if both are owned by the same people? Another mismanagement issue! I would have assumed that they must be competitors. Apparently they haven't been since 1998.

    Then again, it's not a unique situation. Hot Wheels and Matchbox are both owned by Mattel.

    Still, I would say this is a great example of overconglomeration. Why should one company own more than one brand that makes the same product? Perhaps some antitrust action is in order for remaining cases like this.

    because there are regional brands, Id never heard of drakes before you mentioned them.

    We have Little Debbie brands here and they are probably not sold up north.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Drake's is a Hostess brand.

    It, what... *looks up*... oh. Okay, now that's odd. Considering the similarity between Drake's and Hostess products, why expend the resources to maintain the manufacture of both if both are owned by the same people? Another mismanagement issue! I would have assumed that they must be competitors. Apparently they haven't been since 1998.

    Then again, it's not a unique situation. Hot Wheels and Matchbox are both owned by Mattel.

    Still, I would say this is a great example of overconglomeration. Why should one company own more than one brand that makes the same product? Perhaps some antitrust action is in order for remaining cases like this.

    Usually when a company owns multiple brands that effectively sell the same product, it is usually because of fractionilization of the market. The board of directors probably has received advice that it would be more profitable to live with the inefficiencies of the fractionalization than it would be to consolidate the market.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    We do have Little Debbie up here but not in any significant market share.

    Regional brands are an odd thing indeed. My favorite potato chips (Utz) cannot be found outside of the northeast.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    It, what... *looks up*... oh. Okay, now that's odd. Considering the similarity between Drake's and Hostess products, why expend the resources to maintain the manufacture of both if both are owned by the same people? Another mismanagement issue! I would have assumed that they must be competitors. Apparently they haven't been since 1998.

    1998 isn't that long ago. They were separate companies for decades before that. When one company takes over another, it is sometimes a good idea to keep the old brand especially, as EB points out, it's a regional one.

    Then again, it's not a unique situation. Hot Wheels and Matchbox are both owned by Mattel.

    Which does seem a bit pointless.

    Still, I would say this is a great example of overconglomeration. Why should one company own more than one brand that makes the same product? Perhaps some antitrust action is in order for remaining cases like this.

    In some cases, that would be a good idea. Rumor has it that 5 companies own 80% of the food production and distribution in this country. I don't know if those numbers are correct but, with the family farm rapidly dying out, it wouldn't surprise me.

    That just seems like a bad idea to me.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • There are times when takeovers and consolidations result in companies competing with themselves. I can't imagine why anyone would do that over an extended period. There should be a transition. Mad Ave. does it all the time by claiming something is "New".

    When I was studying management stuff, competing with yourself was called something that is really not suitable for this board.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    It, what... *looks up*... oh. Okay, now that's odd. Considering the similarity between Drake's and Hostess products, why expend the resources to maintain the manufacture of both if both are owned by the same people? Another mismanagement issue! I would have assumed that they must be competitors. Apparently they haven't been since 1998.

    1998 isn't that long ago. They were separate companies for decades before that. When one company takes over another, it is sometimes a good idea to keep the old brand especially, as EB points out, it's a regional one.

    What I would instead say is that IBC had no business buying Drake's if it already owned Hostess. Perhaps this sort of stuff needs to come under more regulatory scrutiny, because...

    Rumor has it that 5 companies own 80% of the food production and distribution in this country.

    This is true in most industries these days. Over the past 20 years or so there have been a lot of buyouts and mergers in the corporate world which has resulted in a lot of homogenization of the market for everything. What's perverse is that each of the handful of major players in each indurstry owns a lot of different brands, which gives the consumer an artificial illusion of diversity in the marketplace. If everyone were forced to display prominently the logo of their parent company on all their packaging, all of a sudden you'd notice how few players in the game there actually are.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    It is possible some unhealthy Chinese product will become popular.

    Yes, I bet you a scrap RPG Maker project it'll be Chinese, whatever it is. As for unhealthy, Chinese stuff makes you fat even if you're anorexically skinny, so how unhealthy do you think it'll be?

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • Perhaps we should refrain from taking a swipe at other countries, don't you think.

    One of the phrases I learned when I was studying Mandarin translates as "Let us go and eat fat" which is a sort of invitation to lunch between two magnates. In old China, a fat person was considered wealthy because most people didn't have enough money to eat well enough to gain any weight.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Carefully read the fine print. You'd be surprised how much Kraft Foods owns.

    Quite a bit. I've never heard of most of those because they seem to be regional. But that does show how wide their reach is.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Quite a bit. I've never heard of most of those because they seem to be regional. But that does show how wide their reach is.

    Not all these brands are under control of Kraft anymore, however. In October, Kraft split itself up. Mondelez international kept control of most of the snack foods business. The North-American grocery business was spun off to Kraft Foods Group. Interesting to see the company actually split up given consolidation is prevalent in the food industry.

    It'll be interesting to see who (single or multiple) buys the Hostess brands.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • Then there is the retail game. In Ontario there are two, and only two, companies that control the grocery business: Weston Foods Ltd. (a.k.a. Loblaw's), and the Oshawa Wholesale Group (a.k.a. Sobies, IGA et. al.). The discriminator is the presence of the key corporate brands on the shelves.

    Westons: President's Choice

    Oshawa Wholesale: Our Compliments.

    By their brands ye shall know them.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an Account  

    Sign up to join our friendly community. It's easy!  

    Register a New Account

    Sign In  

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

    Sign in to follow this  

    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×

    Help Keep Simtropolis Online, Open & Free!

    stexcollection-header.png

    Would you be able to help us catch up after a bit of a shortfall?

    We had a small shortfall last month. Your donation today would help us catch up for this month.

    Make a Donation, Get a Gift!

    We need to continue to raise enough money each month to pay for expenses which includes hardware, bandwidth, software licenses, support licenses and other necessary 3rd party costs.

    By way of a "Thank You" gift, we'd like to send you our STEX Collector's DVD. It's some of the best buildings, lots, maps and mods collected for you over the years. Check out the STEX Collections for more info.

    Each donation helps keep Simtropolis online, open and free!

    Thank you for reading and enjoy the site!

    More About STEX Collections